• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Stupidity of the American Voter?

i actually accept the fact that Gruber nailed it in calling the liberal base stupid

It's perfectly normal to get upset when you've been embarrassed so easily on a subject you hold so near and dear. I mean honestly, why would you make up that you know how the Founding Fathers felt? It was dumb, and you put yourself in a losing situation.
 
Really? So you believe it is okay for a federal government to spend many millions of dollars to bully a private entity?

You're overstating the reality, but I do expect them to go after the guilty, yes.
 
11 million? So how does that enhance Wal-Mart's bottomline when a contractor hired illegal workers. How do you know they lowered their fee to Wal-Mart for their services?



Were there other contractors available to do the same work? You seem to be an expert on this case although I doubt it as you cut and pasted what you want to believe but didn't read the entire article or want to believe that the illegal's didn't enhance Wal-Mart's bottomline

It's still cheaper than paying a living wage to workers.
 
Please cite some examples of the Constitution being violated.

Have you been keeping up with current events? At all? Where in the Constitution does the federal government get the power to force us to buy health care? Where does the president get the power to make laws? Or decide not to enforce laws? Or do things (like make laws) that are reserved for another branch of government? are you familiar with "separation of powers"?
 
Have you been keeping up with current events? At all? Where in the Constitution does the federal government get the power to force us to buy health care? Where does the president get the power to make laws? Or decide not to enforce laws? Or do things (like make laws) that are reserved for another branch of government? are you familiar with "separation of powers"?

I must admit, I am not familiar with executive privilege, and I won't begin to defend it. It's been around, and it's been used, but I don't know where it comes from and how it came into existence. The Affordable Care Act has, so far, been upheld as Constitutional.
 
You said that the collapse of America began some 100 years ago. The progressive era probably never would have come about if the Confederates had won.
Can you tell me when the civil war ended?

Can you tell me when the Progressives had their great victory in the direct election of Senators?

Can you tell me how many years, feel free to round to decades if that is easier for you, passed between those two events?
 
I must admit, I am not familiar with executive privilege, and I won't begin to defend it. It's been around, and it's been used, but I don't know where it comes from and how it came into existence. The Affordable Care Act has, so far, been upheld as Constitutional.
Executive privilege just means the Executive can keep his deliberations secret.

Executive orders, when used to control and run the executive branch, are perfectly legitimate tools.

However, using an executive order to create a new law or to change an existing law is unconstitutional and should cause a crisis. By failing to stop The One on the golf course early the Congress has created an imperial presidency, currently controlled by a lawless, megalomaniac.
 
Last edited:
Executive privilege just means the Executive can keep his deliberations secret.

Executive orders, when used to control and run the executive branch are perfectly legitimate tools.

However, using an executive order to create a new law or to change an existing law is unconstitutional and should cause a crisis. By failing to stop The One on the golf course early the Congress has created an imperial presidency, currently controlled by a lawless, megalomaniac.

Yes correct, I mean executive orders not privilege.
 
"Can you tell me when the civil war ended?

Can you tell me when the Progressives had their great victory in the direct election of Senators?

Can you tell me how many years, feel free to round to decades if that is easier for you, passed between those two events?"
The Civil War ended in 1865, and the so-called Progressive Era is between the 1890-1920.

Yeah?
One out of two ain't bad.
The 17th Amendment removing the states from any power at the federal level occurred in 1913. How many years were there between 1865, the end of the civil war, and 1913, the beginning of the end of the nation as a country founded upon limited government?


Then explain your civil war connection. If you can.
 
It's still cheaper than paying a living wage to workers.

Love how liberals believe they know what a living wage is for everyone else and how liberals always buy the rhetoric from others who don't have a clue as well. Let's face it, Gruber nailed it
 
I must admit, I am not familiar with executive privilege, and I won't begin to defend it. It's been around, and it's been used, but I don't know where it comes from and how it came into existence. The Affordable Care Act has, so far, been upheld as Constitutional.

Even though the SCOTUS upheld it, it is still not anywhere in the Constitution. Is slavery in there? They upheld that too.
 
Love how liberals believe they know what a living wage is for everyone else and how liberals always buy the rhetoric from others who don't have a clue as well. Let's face it, Gruber nailed it

Funny how they want companies, like Walmart, to pay more than the market rate for their workforce. If that's their philosophy, I'm sure they can come up with plenty of examples of liberals demanding to pay more than the asking price for goods at stores, like Walmart, so that these beloved workers can be over paid like they want.
 
Even though the SCOTUS upheld it, it is still not anywhere in the Constitution. Is slavery in there? They upheld that too.

The Constitution does not spell out every possible thing Congress can do. It's a guideline.

And hold on. First of all, don't compare slavery to a bill that attempts to improve health care for everyone in the country. That's dumb as ****.

Secondly, building tanks isn't in there either. Flying drones. I don't recall the CIA being in the Constitution. What about Air Force One? I don't recall that being written in by the Founders either.

Let's try to argue above a grade school level here, please.
 
Love how liberals believe they know what a living wage is for everyone else and how liberals always buy the rhetoric from others who don't have a clue as well. Let's face it, Gruber nailed it

That's the funniest part of this whole brew-ha-ha: Gruber was referring to the neo-communists, more than any other group.
 
The Constitution does not spell out every possible thing Congress can do. It's a guideline.

And hold on. First of all, don't compare slavery to a bill that attempts to improve health care for everyone in the country. That's dumb as ****.

Secondly, building tanks isn't in there either. Flying drones. I don't recall the CIA being in the Constitution. What about Air Force One? I don't recall that being written in by the Founders either.

Let's try to argue above a grade school level here, please.

Obamacare was never intended to improve healthcare.
 
Obamacare was never intended to improve healthcare.

Sure it was - for the entire country, though. The ACA improves health care by involving everyone. The more people with health care, the better off this country will be.
 
Sure it was - for the entire country, though. The ACA improves health care by involving everyone. The more people with health care, the better off this country will be.

It's wealth redistribution...period. That's why they had to lie about it.
 
It's wealth redistribution...period. That's why they had to lie about it.

Taxes are not wealth redistribution. The government does provide some services, and it was designed to be able to do that through taxation. Yes, you and tres are the reason Gruber felt the ACA needed to be disguised, because apparently taxation = communism now.

It's, uhh, sad at best.
 
Back
Top Bottom